Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
A book to skim fast, August 10, 2008
Unfortunately i have to mostly agree with several of the other reviews on this site that gave this book poor ratings. The Dragon's Trail: The Biography of Raphael's Masterpiece, which Ms. Pitman claims is "kind of personal journey of discovery," and in which she characterizes herself as neither a "professional art historian or a scholar" depicts Raphael's painting of St. George and the Dragon as an art "object." She traces the "historical journey" of the painting from its original rendering by Raphael in the early 16th century through its present resting place in the National Gallery, Washington DC. She employs three basic approaches in her narrative: one, the presentation of historical information in a readable fashion, two, depiction of personal experience and travel, and, three, imaginative rendering of "what it must have been like." The idea has potential, but the approach, in the pen of Ms. Pitman, ends up mostly as fluff because she is unable to satisfactorily weave together fact and imaginative writing. It is the third of the three approaches that significantly detracts from an otherwise informative account. When she manages a paragraph or two of just plain factual writing, it isn't bad. We get interesting information presented in a readable and straight-forward manner. But she wants to hold the general reader's interest with a non-academic, imaginative rendering of "what it must have been like." This is the part that reeks of cliches and bad writing. The writing is so transparently patronizing of "what is must have been like," as rendered with strings of facile sensate images, and hyperbolic words, that I somehow feel that Ms. Pitman had intended these parts for a pre-teenage audience. But if so, it is especially important not to expose this age group, of all audiences, to bad taste in writing. On the other hand, if intended for a larger general audience, which is likely the case, one can't render a non-specialist account simply by asserting this is the intention. The ability to write regardless of the intention is the first requirement. And this ability is simply not there, at least in this book. I believe that Ms. Pittman is not concious that she is exercerising bad taste in writing in these parts, which are abundant. The result, unfortunately, is a pretty bad book mostly because it conceived and portrayed as much more than just a cheap romance novel. I suggest for those readers interested in the subject and the theme, that they skim the book, holding their eyes and nose when they get to the "literary" parts. Get the information and run, so to speak. It is also worth noting that Ms. Pittman, in her Acknowledgements section, indicates that her husband was dying of cancer during the writing of this book. This may explain, in part, the unconscious rendering of objectively bad writing. How much can a person duly focus on the task during a period like this? Perhaps Ms. Pittman's deeper self was engaged outside the writing. In this regard, she is to be commended for pulling this off. I remember reading John Gunther's book, Death Be Not Proud, about the death of his son. There are sections of that book that are really strained. One has to ease off in one's criticism in cases like these. It doesn't make an excuse for bad writing, but it does say, people endure by doing what they have to do, and the result is mixed. That's the way I come down on this book, which I will finish reading in the way I describe above.
|
|
|
4.0 out of 5 stars
St. George and the Dragon Gallop Through History, December 5, 2008
This book reads like a fast-paced historical novel. Next week I am spending a day at the National Gallery of Art in Washington, D.C. My first stop will be to see St. George and the Dragon.
|
|
|
|